Impact on Universities

[6862]

I can't imagine a lot more grim (other than being in prison, which would be very similar) of having to spend 10 days alone isolated in a tiny student individual room with no easy access to kitchen etc.

This is the plan for my university and more specifically the university owned block where I live. It is going to happen as soon as anyone gets a cold (even if the symptoms don't match COVID - as a recent experience of a friend showed), and is essentially the university imprisoning us.

 

[trebor79]

This is the plan for my university and more specifically the university owned block where I live. It is going to happen as soon as anyone gets a cold (even if the symptoms don't match COVID - as a recent experience of a friend showed), and is essentially the university imprisoning us.

They don't have the right to do that. Ignore any such edicts.

 

[Adam Williams]

Amazing that they can find enough space to make parking available, when I was there it was an absolute nightmare and they've expanded student numbers and removed parking since

Ha, I'm sure you won't be surprised to hear that parking capacity and permit costs are still just as much a bone of contention as they were when you were there

Think the push (which the council has been involved in) has very much been towards public transport for anyone that could use it; though that has its own challenges during a pandemic...

They don't have the right to do that. Ignore any such edicts.

How about we don't encourage potentially-positive students to go and spread the virus to their flat-mates..

If students have symptoms (and I mean actual Covid-19 symptoms - not 'the sniffles'), they should be getting tested. Ideally the university would facilitate this in a timely manner, but if not there are always e.g. the NHS postal testing kits as an option. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the test is going to be negative and life can be resumed as normal as soon as results are received/there's no fever.

There is absolutely a legal power for public health officials to direct potentially infectious persons to self-isolate under the 2020 Act (sched 21), but if people are sensible and self-isolate (which y'know, is the course of action which isn't selfish) the powers would be entirely unnecessary.

 

[trebor79]

There is absolutely a legal power for public health officials to direct potentially infectious persons to self-isolate under the 2020 Act (sched 21), but if people are sensible and self-isolate (which y'know, is the course of action which isn't selfish) the powers would be entirely unnecessary.

Yes, but there's no legal power for a university to imprison you in your accomodation. Or (in at least one case up thread) do that and then force you to buy their hugely expensive deliveries of supplies.
How about universities trust these adults to do the right thing? I'd posit they are *less* likely to try and pretend they aren't possibly infected if they don't have draconian and costly measures hanging over them.

 

[Jozhua]

Yes, but there's no legal power for a university to imprison you in your accomodation. Or (in at least one case up thread) do that and then force you to buy their hugely expensive deliveries of supplies.
How about universities trust these adults to do the right thing? I'd posit they are *less* likely to try and pretend they aren't possibly infected if they don't have draconian and costly measures hanging over them.

I agree, the less you treat students like adults, the less they will act like them.

 

[Adam Williams]

Or (in at least one case up thread) do that and then force you to buy their hugely expensive deliveries of supplies.

I agree charging them £350 is not proportionate (though I've not seen any concrete evidence to confirm any university has actually tried to impose this yet, so I'm not going to get out my pitchfork just yet ). That's what, £35 a day for 10 days isolation from positive test? That's eat-out-at-a-restaurant-multiple-times-a-day pricing.

How about universities trust these adults to do the right thing?

I think they overwhelmingly are (encouraging them to assess their own symptoms and isolate/get tested if they have concerns), but it's a difficult line to tread. If you see isolation at home (where home in practice = the student's accommodation they're renting) as draconian, I'm not sure what you see as other non-draconian options that are available?

Separate accommodation would be ideal in some respects, though then you have the risk of housing potentially positive students together without increasing the risk to those who have symptoms but ultimately not an active Coronavirus infection.

Personally I think the universities offering their own testing (with a fast turnaround of a day or so) are in the best position to limit unnecessary isolation.

 

[trebor79]

I think they overwhelmingly are (encouraging them to assess their own symptoms and isolate/get tested if they have concerns), but it's a difficult line to tread. If you see isolation at home (where home in practice = the student's accommodation they're renting) as draconian, I'm not sure what you see as other non-draconian options that are available?

Separate accommodation would be ideal in some respects, though then you have the risk of housing potentially positive students together without increasing the risk to those who have symptoms but ultimately not an active Coronavirus infection.

Personally I think the universities offering their own testing (with a fast turnaround of a day or so) are in the best position to limit unnecessary isolation.

Personally I don't think this virus should be treated with any more care than the flu, as it's roughly as dangerous as flu.
Even if it turns out to be a bit more dangerous than flu (and let's be clear, it's nothing like as dangerous as something like Ebola, SARS or MERS, even the worst estimates [using real data, not models based upon incorrect assumptions] it's only a little worse than a bad flu year), we just can't carry on like this with the economic and therefore longer term health impacts getting worse by the day.

The world has collectively lost it's mind.

 

[Kingspanner]

Nonsense.

" Doctors and scientists are working to estimate the mortality rate of COVID-19, but at present, it is thought to be substantially higher (possibly 10 times or more) than that of most strains of the flu".

Source https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/hea...ronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu
More here https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...han-1918-spanish-flu-seasonal-flu/3378208001/

 

[trebor79]

Nonsense.
" Doctors and scientists are working to estimate the mortality rate of COVID-19, but at present, it is thought to be substantially higher (possibly 10 times or more) than that of most strains of the flu".
Source https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/hea...ronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu
More here https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...han-1918-spanish-flu-seasonal-flu/3378208001/

I'll raise your nonsense and say piffle.
Depends. Are they talking about Case Fatality Rate or Infection Fatality Rate? It matters.
As we don't obsessively test for flu infection, the fatality rate quoted is the IFR, based upon epidemiological estimates of total infection.
For covid, we seem to be using case fatality rate, based upon number of deaths versus number of confirmed positive tests.
Even ignoring the dodgy covid death figures until that was fixed, it's comparing apples with oranges.
IFR and CFR are completely different measures. See https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/09/04/covid-why-terminology-really-matters/

In epidemiology, a case fatality rate (CFR) — sometimes called case fatality risk or disease lethality — is the proportion of deaths from a certain disease compared to the total number of symptomatic people diagnosed with the disease.’ [...]
The infection fatality rate is the measure of how many people who are infected (even those without symptoms, or very mild symptoms) who then die. This is the critical figure to know because it gives you an accurate assessment of the total number of deaths you are likely to see.

This misunderstanding seems to be at the root of some of the dodgy modelling that got us into this ridiculous mess in the first place.

 

[Kingspanner]

I'll take your piffle and raise you clutching-at-straws
Infection fatality rate

National Geographic

Explore National Geographic. A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration.

www.nationalgeographic.co.uk

 

[trebor79]

I'll take your piffle and raise you clutching-at-straws
Infection fatality rate

National Geographic

Explore National Geographic. A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration.

www.nationalgeographic.co.uk

Interesting article, but there are some very odd numbers in there. It says the IFR for flu is between 1 and 10 per 100,000 infections. That's between 0.001% and 0.01%.

That's just not right. Flu IFR is generally accepted to be in the range of 0.2% to 0.5%, depending upon the year, strain etc.

 

[DB]

I'll take your piffle and raise you clutching-at-straws
Infection fatality rate

National Geographic

Explore National Geographic. A world leader in geography, cartography and exploration.

www.nationalgeographic.co.uk

Given that there is no solid base of evidence for number of actual infections for either flu or this coronavirus, that report is basically in the realms of speculation.

In the past few months increased testing has already demonstrated that the prevalence of the coronavirus amongst younger people is much higher than previously thought - they just don't show symptoms in the majority of cases, or only very mild ones.

Trying to calculate an infection-fatality rate for flu without serious amounts of data is also dubious, given that there are many strains and severity fluctuates from year to year - an average of all of them would require a lot of studies feeding into it - the report you city concedes that there are only a 'handful'.

 

[MikeWM]

Interesting article.

Rather poor article, I'd say. And I don't like the sensationalist picture of a body bag and a blood-stained bed one bit. Adding NatGeo to my list of publications to ignore for a while.

I had a quick play with the modelling referenced in the opening paragraphs, which can be found here https://covid-19.tacc.utexas.edu/projections/ and I'm not convinced that a model that says Texas will have somewhere between 18 and 2312 (!) daily deaths just three weeks from now is really predicting much at all...

Worth reminding ourselves that in July there were many people predicting armageddon in places like Texas and Florida. Yes, they've now had their delayed first wave. But now it is well past the peak in these states.

 

[Kingspanner]

This middle paragraph seems to shoot itself in the foot but I suspect this is the reporter not the original source
"Using the handful of studies that have calculated infection-fatality rates for seasonal flu, Meyerowitz-Katz determined that somewhere between 1 and 10 people die for every 100,000 that are infected. For COVID-19, that number ranges between 500 and 1,000 deaths per 100,000 infections. By his calculations, the coronavirus is likely to be 50 to 100 times more deadly than the seasonal flu, which supports the Columbia University findings".

 

[trebor79]

This middle paragraph seems to shoot itself in the foot but I suspect this is the reporter not the original source
"Using the handful of studies that have calculated infection-fatality rates for seasonal flu, Meyerowitz-Katz determined that somewhere between 1 and 10 people die for every 100,000 that are infected. For COVID-19, that number ranges between 500 and 1,000 deaths per 100,000 infections. By his calculations, the coronavirus is likely to be 50 to 100 times more deadly than the seasonal flu, which supports the Columbia University findings".

Yeah but the between 1 and 10 figure is nonsense. It's about 500.
@MikeWM has demolished the general thrust and time of the article.as he points out the studies upon which it is based are pretty much useless, leaving aside the journalists mistakes.

 

[Cowley]

This is quite a long way from discussing discussing the impact on universities now.
Can we try and keep the discussion on death and infection rates to their relevant threads and use this one for what it was set up for please. Thank you.

There’s a more relevant thread here:

Covid : Infection rates v death rates and a possible second wave

I've said all along there will be no "second wave" (as defined by as spike in the death rate more or less as high as the first) in any similar country to the UK with a death rate above (pref well above) 500 per million. Note I am not saying there will not be bumps and dips in the graph curves...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[6862]

Back on topic to universities:

They don't have the right to do that. Ignore any such edicts.

Unfortunately, we are required to agree to these measures (isolation with Covid-like symptoms) as a condition of study this year. So they are giving themselves this power by making us sign.

 

[AdamWW]

The catch is that we'll have to pay £350 (this varies depending on college, at least one charges £600) for supplies to be delivered during the two week isolation period. It would be rare for me to spend even half that much on food during an entire term, and I would very rarely spend that in a normal fortnight (maybe if I've got a few big events and have a couple of major trips out as well). The stress of losing that amount of money is making most of us very worried, and I've already heard some people will not get tested, even if they have symptoms, because they can't afford that amount of money (I don't condone that attitude but it does exist).

Just a thought....that really is £350 per head, not £350 for the group of 6-8?

 

[NorthOxonian]

Just a thought....that really is £350 per head, not £350 for the group of 6-8?

I'm pretty certain it's per head, but I've not yet seen all the details, so I could be wrong. They certainly seem to be charging it per head for internationals who have to quarantine, and it seems those arrangements will apply to those self-isolating.

 

[6862]

I'm pretty certain it's per head, but I've not yet seen all the details, so I could be wrong. They certainly seem to be charging it per head for internationals who have to quarantine, and it seems those arrangements will apply to those self-isolating.

It is a similar amount being charged to international students where I live, I assume a similar amount will apply to us non-internationals if we have to isolate.

 

[AdamWW]

It is a similar amount being charged to international students where I live, I assume a similar amount will apply to us non-internationals if we have to isolate.

Bizarre. I know international students are seen as something of a cash cow, but....

 

[brick60000]

I wonder what impact the latest restrictions will have on clubs & societies. Presumably any gatherings of those are considered “socialising”. I can’t imagine they’ll be classed as educational though.

What a mess....you’d have to laugh at the incompetence if it wasn’t stuffing up people’s real lives.

 

[Huntergreed]

I wonder what impact the latest restrictions will have on clubs & societies. Presumably any gatherings of those are considered “socialising”. I can’t imagine they’ll be classed as educational though.

What a mess....you’d have to laugh at the incompetence if it wasn’t stuffing up people’s real lives.

Our university was planning a “socially-distanced quiz night”, with tables sat in groups of 6 and spread out. Needless to say this has now been cancelled, meaning there are now absolutely no events for freshers to attend. What a depressing thought

 

[Bletchleyite]

Our university was planning a “socially-distanced quiz night”, with tables sat in groups of 6 and spread out. Needless to say this has now been cancelled, meaning there are now absolutely no events for freshers to attend. What a depressing thought

Yet that same situation can arise in a pub as it's not a single organised event. Ridiculous.

 

[brick60000]

Yet that same situation can arise in a pub as it's not a single organised event. Ridiculous.

Absolutely, and this has been one of my biggest issues with this all along.

What is the difference between a socially distanced gathering of people that know each other, and of those that don’t?

None, of course, except that doesn’t seem to fit the agenda...

 

[trebor79]

What's worse is that a high proportion of people are buying into this nonsense, including people who really ought to know better. I normally meet up with some old uni mates once or twice a year. We haven't done anything since mid-November. I proposed we do something before we get confined to quarters again. Two completely up for it, one non-committal, one "I'm not sure it's a good idea for people from different parts of the country to meet up". He was unable to explain why he perceived greater risk from us than his next door neighbour. His fear seems to be rooted in government messaging and the fact one of his colleagues father died from it. This gut is a chartered civil engineer.
The non-committal friend lives in London, has a pretty high-up job in the MOD and is also a chartered engineer. He's worried that people in London "aren't following the government advice. It's all downhill from here". Doesn't think the total absence of any strategy from the government is a concern.
COVID and anything relating to it are banned topics in our house as it just ends up in my wife getting irate at what she sees as my "don't give a s***" attitude when I question the rational of these edicts.

 

[Yew]

What's worse is that a high proportion of people are buying into this nonsense, including people who really ought to know better. I normally meet up with some old uni mates once or twice a year. We haven't done anything since mid-November. I proposed we do something before we get confined to quarters again. Two completely up for it, one non-committal, one "I'm not sure it's a good idea for people from different parts of the country to meet up". He was unable to explain why he perceived greater risk from us than his next door neighbour. His fear seems to be rooted in government messaging and the fact one of his colleagues father died from it. This gut is a chartered civil engineer.
The non-committal friend lives in London, has a pretty high-up job in the MOD and is also a chartered engineer. He's worried that people in London "aren't following the government advice. It's all downhill from here". Doesn't think the total absence of any strategy from the government is a concern.
COVID and anything relating to it are banned topics in our house as it just ends up in my wife getting irate at what she sees as my "don't give a s***" attitude when I question the rational of these edicts.

Like, perhaps in the early days, when cases were mostly concentrated in London, or with local lockdown areas. But for the most part we have a fairly uniform prevelenace across the country.

I suppose you can argue that it could be the public transport aspect, but DB have found that not a single case can be directly attributed to Rail travel in germany

 

[PTR 444]

It would be an absolute shambles if clubs and societies could not go ahead because of this latest restriction. One of my local nightclubs had planned to reopen for a socially distant welcome back party next week, but despite the new 6 person limit, the event is still going ahead as planned since they only intended to a maximum of 6 people per group regardless.

If a nightclub can reopen under these new restrictions, why shouldn’t clubs and societies be allowed to take place, albeit with a separate seating area for every group of 6?

 

[cuccir]

Part 1

Sans the larger lectures, students should be getting the same seminars and practicals, as these are where the true learning happens.

One thing that (as a lecturer responsible for running a degree course) seems to be coming through to me is that the majority of students haven't reflected on what this in person teaching will look like (and I don't blame them - I hadn't until I sat down to start planning sessions in August).

The normal 'small-group discussions' can't happen as we will be having to maintain social distancing. Everyone will be in masks anyway and while we will have the visor-style masks, I suspect most students will be in voice-muffling ones. We can't print out and pass materials around, and we can't let students share pens/paper. That really eliminates most 'table-work' as well that a group might do eg filling out ideas on a flip-chart, solving a task or discussing an article together. We can (and are) redesigning the in-person activities that we're doing and I still think that they add value, but frankly I think they add less value than the traditional seminar.

Lab practicals will be very limited: with reduced numbers in, there is less time available per class. It will only be very essential stuff, with teaching deferred to other years. Same goes for fieldwork of most kinds. IT room practicals can happen but again there will be differences eg someone can't come and lean over your shoulder, or use your mouse/keyboard. As with seminars they still add value, but much less so than previously.

--
Part 2


If I was in complete control of things at my uni, I'd move 90% of timetabled activites online, with exceptions based mainly on the nature of what's being taught - it would mainly be skills/methods material in-person. I'd then give all students a fortnightly meeting in an office with a personal tutor who can discuss progress, readings, assessments etc. This doesn't sound like a lot but actually in a well-run meeting, a lot of guidance can be given in this sort of context. These meetings are also just about the safest thing you can do as you can maintain 2m distancing, masks can be worn and sanitizers used. Then also make sure all lecturing staff have at least 3 hours-worth of additional bookable meeting slots a week for other students.

The other advantage of this approach is that individual meetings can easily be moved online if there are local lockdowns, or if individual staff/students need to do so for health or other reasons. Trying to timetable people to all be in one place together is going to just fall part I think. Near me we've had a flare-up in cases (I live 5 miles from this football club which has been blamed for much of it), which in turn has caused things like schools and nurseries to close. This will keep happening at different locations, and I increasingly feel that if we organize group-sized in-person teaching with any regularity, we're just going to end up with so much of it being cancelled because staff/students will miss sessions due to self-isolating, or having to be off work for emergency childcare because their kids' school was shut that morning, or because of a local lockdown etc etc. In a way, it's not even the risk of spreading the disease in the class itself that's the problem, but the practicality of reliably getting 20 people together in a room at the same time and keeping to some sort of timetable that gets the teaching done by May.

 

[HSTEd]

Lab practicals will be very limited: with reduced numbers in, there is less time available per class. It will only be very essential stuff, with teaching deferred to other years. Same goes for fieldwork of most kinds. IT room practicals can happen but again there will be differences eg someone can't come and lean over your shoulder, or use your mouse/keyboard. As with seminars they still add value, but much less so than previously.

The lab I demonstrate in will apparently consist of oen person from each pair of students watching me do an experiment for two or three hours, then they get given the data and leave.